Forum:Deleting all tactics pages
17:37, December 3, 2011 (UTC) I created a thread somewhat like this a while ago. Sadly it never piked up, Hopefully this one gets going. Super2k 01:03, December 4, 2011 (UTC) I think they should stay. Unlike with, say, Halo, where the majority of it's (now halopedian.com) wiki's content is canonical, most content here applies mainly to gameplay anyways. I suggest to remove or restate the badely written stuff, or to make one page labled "tactics" where stragies can be listed bullet pointed. Jabberwockxeno 22:43, December 6, 2011 (UTC) :The issue is that strategy pages, and strategy in general, are very, very hard to rewrite and maintain utter distance from the reader -- it's hard to avoid using "you" at least once. Secondly, more disturbingly, is that tactics pages are naturally biased. There are a few examples which are very, very exceptional because they apply to modern, real-life combat. But for the vast majority of "tactics" the wording infers a bias. Йура15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 22:49, December 6, 2011 (UTC) ::My statement repeats to Jabber, if any kind of tactic is used in any map (or some/all) that info should be in the map article itself. Tactics/mechanics using weapons, like Suppressive Fire either should be completley re-vamped or placed as tactic 'in a separate heading' of the type of weapon it is mainly used for such, like the Machine Gun in this case. Any other case should get deletion. This is my opinion (which is basically support Yuri's suggestion. No need for specific pages for tactics). -- Pedro9basket ([[User talk:Pedro9basket|talk]]) 16:01, December 7, 2011 (UTC) ::@Yuri, aren't all human activities/decisions influenced by bias, one way or another? I know what you mean, but I'm just saying. Also, I don't want this Wiki to become the Cod Wiki, where they have deleted all tactics-related pages, under the guise of those aricles as being unecessary. Some of them were, but some of them helped inform people of what went down in Multiplayer. I think many of the tactics-related articles here need a major rehaul, in terms of style and manner in which it is written, but also think similar topics should be merged, not just put onto another page having to do with a weapon/vehicle that has to do with the tactics. Charcoal121 17:05, December 9, 2011 (UTC) :::Dude, if it's good for this wiki it doesn't matter if it was (or was not) good for another. I've ALWAYS been of the opinion that anything biased doesn't belong in a wiki, which is meant to serve as an encyclopedia. We're a really small wiki, and having content which is by definition a manifestation of the author's perception is in general a big "no-no". Most are irrelevant and not really related to Battlefield at all. Йура15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 19:57, December 9, 2011 (UTC) :::Getting a bit off topic, but instead of having separate pages for specific weapons like Machine Gun and Assault Rifle, we should move this information to the category pages, such as on other wikis. :::I know, it seems like copypasta and we want to be our own wiki. But IMHO, it makes more sense that way. Then the lists of those weapons/vehicles/whatever are directly after the category "article" and other vehicles/weapons/etc. in the category can be easily added. :::But for the tactics pages, we could instead make sub-pages for maps and vehicles as to what works and what doesn't work in given situations. As an example, say a bunch of us have an idea of how to dominate Arica Harbor in Rush. Someone could set up a subpage called ''Arica Harbor/Strategies and have a dedicated "Rush" section heading, where users would post what they tend to do in a round when defending or attacking. :::These strategies would essentially be multiplayer tips for Arica and would collectively with the other map, vehicle, and whatever sub-pages, be a multiplayer guide. However, we'd want maybe a template at the top that gives a warning that these strategies won't always work, and that they are only suggestions as to how to play a round on Arica. We'd want them to mostly cover the role of every kit as to what they may want to do, and what to do with the given vehicles. I might make an example later if I get the time. 18:14, December 9, 2011 (UTC) ::::I'd rather gut the whole idea of tactics now and save the trouble. Your idea is like opening up the floodgates, not bracing them. Users have blogs and personal sub pages to do that. I just want this crap off the mainspace. Йура15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 19:57, December 9, 2011 (UTC) :::::Agreed. We can have an encyclopedic wiki while still maintaining all related gaming advice in blog posts. It's a win-win situation. Just look at some of Zealot Guy's blog posts. The obvious problem is that the blog posts get pushed out over time by newer ones but it isn't that bad. Th3 razor 20:13, December 9, 2011 (UTC) :::::You make a good point, Yuri. That would be better suited for blogs and such. Otherwise, it would get really ugly with my idea... never mind that, then. But for the pages like all of the weapon types, they would be better suited for category pages than separate articles. 20:16, December 9, 2011 (UTC) ::::::Yeah, I actually agree with that part. Йура15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 20:17, December 9, 2011 (UTC) }}